1. These references under S.60(1) of the Travancore-Cochin Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, raise a common question regarding the interpretation of S.5 0) of the said enactment. The assessee in I. T. R. Nos. 15 (assessment year: 1953-54), 18 (assessment year: 1951-52) and 19 (assessment year: 1952-53) is the Travancore Rubber & Tea Company Ltd., Alleppey; and the assessee in I T. R. No. 16 (assessment year year: 1953-54) is the Murphy Elites Ltd., Pathirapally. In I. T. R. Nos. 15 and 16 the Appellate Tribunal (Sri. Nandana Menon) rejected the contention of the assessees and dismissed the appeals and in I.T. R. Nos. 18 and 19 the Appellate Tribunal (Sri Velu Pillai) accepted the contention of the assessee and allowed the appeals.

2. The question arising for decision is identically worded in all the four references, the only difference being as regards the accounting years and the amounts concerned. The question referred in I. T. R. No. 15 of 1955 reads as follows:

"Whether under the Travancore-Cochin Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, in calculating the assessable agricultural income of a rubber estate already planted and containing both mature yielding rubber trees and also immature rubber plants which have not come into bearing, the annual expenses incurred for the upkeep and maintenance of such rubber plants, are not a permissible deduction, and if so, whether the sum of Rs. 42660-4-1 expended by the assessee in the relevant accounting year 1952, under this head may be deducted".

3. S.2 (a) of the Travancore-Cochin Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, defines "Agricultural income" unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context"- as meaning:

(1) any rent or revenue derived from land which is used for agricultural purposes;

(2) any income derived from such land in the State by -

(i) agricultural, or"

(ii) the performance by a cultivator or receiver of rent-in-kind to render the produce raised or received by him fit to be taken to market, or

(iii) the sale by a cultivator or receiver of rent-in-kind of the produce raised or received by him, in respect of which no process has been performed other than a process of the nature described in sub-cluase (ii);

Explanation: - Agricultural income derived from such land by the cultivation of tea means that portion of the income derived from the cultivation, manufacture, and sale of tea as is defined to be agricultural income for the purpose of the enactments relating to Indian Income-tax;

(3) any income derived from any building owned and occupied by the receiver of the rent or revenue of any such land or occupied by the cultivator or the receiver of rent-in-kind of any land with respect to which or the produce of which any operation-mentioned in sub-clauses (ii) and (iii) of clause (2) is carried on:

Provided that the building is on or in the immediate vicinity of the land, and is a building which the receiver of the rent or revenue or the cultivator or the receiver of the rent-in-kind by reason of his connection with the land, requires as a dwelling-house or as a store-house or other out-building"

and S.5 of the said enactment provides that "the agricultural income of a person shall be computed after making the deductions" enumerated in clauses (a) to (m) of the said section.

4. The deduction admissible under S.5 0) is:

"any expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee) laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of deriving the agricultural income".

We find it impossible to say that the amounts spent on the upkeep and maintenance of the immature rubber plants were laid out or expended "for the purpose of deriving the agricultural income", much less that they were laid out or expended "wholly or exclusively" for that purpose. "The agricultural income", in the context, can only mean the agricultural income obtained in the accounting year concerned and not the agricultural income of any other period.

5. In 1955